Department/Program Review Summary 2004-05 Department: English Date of Review: May 25, 2005 Review Team Members and Titles: Jeanne Jacobs, Vice President for Instruction, Instructional Division Barb Adams, Professor, DEV Debbie Badonsky, Professor, Paralegal Rocky Belcher, Assistant Professor, BIS Jim Brooks, Professor, DEV Doug Easterling, Director, Institutional Planning and Research Helen Grove, Dean, Extended Learning Division Sue Merrell, Director, Curriculum, Assessment & Continuous Improvement Cheryl Reindl-Johnson, Chair, BIS Katy Riehle, Instructor, DEV Gordon Robinson, Counselor/Professor, Business Technologies Chuck Sowerbrower, Chair, Emergency Medical Services Department Members Present: Gary Mitchner, Chair Ken Angel, Professor Jack Bennett, Professor Kay Berg, Professor Susan Callender, Professor Elizabeth Christensen, Assistant Professor Ed Davis, Professor James Dunham, Assistant Professor Fortunate Finley, Secretary Charles Freeland, Assistant Professor Dana Frierson, Associate Professor Kathryn Geiselman, Assistant Professor Sarah Kiewitz, Associate Professor Sally Lahmon, Assistant Professor Mildred Melendez, Professor Carol Nancarrow, Associate Professor Jennifer Riley, Assistant Professor Vicki Stalbird, Assistant Professor Lisa Tyler, Professor Tim Waggoner, Associate Professor Charles Wagner, Professor Richard Jones, Dean, Liberal Arts and Sciences Commendations The English department is commended for the following noteworthy accomplishments: Good sense of the broad mission and variety of stakeholders served by this department Breadth of talent and scholarly activities of faculty members as evidenced in Section 6 of the self-study Respectful collegiality among faculty members Awareness of the importance of quality instruction Commitment to serving students through a variety of learning formats Attention to the relationship of reading to student success in ENG courses Highly interactive discussion during the department review Recommendations for Action: Establish priorities and develop a timeline for implementing the department’s strategic plan, CITs and these recommendations. Explore avenues to offer additional sections of ENG 111 and ENG 112 by o Studying the curricular balance between ENG (12,000 students per year) and LIT (800 students per year) o Expanding distance learning offerings by utilizing part-time faculty o Increasing the number of sections and times offered as suggested by student survey data. Consider a more formal approach to data gathering and analysis that focuses on direct measures of student learning. Update master syllabi to ensure currency and alignment with state transfer and articulation. Utilize common assessment tool(s) to measure course outcomes in high enrollment courses. Continue collaboration with Developmental Studies department to support student transition from DEV to college-level English. Improve and document success of the mentoring process for the part-time faculty. Increase and improve internal communications to ensure common understanding of accurate information about the activities within the department and the support available within the college. Clarify misinformation about the following: o Distance learning “helpdesk” for students and faculty o Classroom and lab scheduling software o Distance learning course proposal process o Faculty training for distance learning course development, e.g., Summer Institute opportunities o Faculty training and development on assessment (including CMT), e.g., faculty training and development opportunities during institutes. Follow through on the departmental CIT stated in Tab #7 of the self-study document to analyze the factors that may have contributed to the increase in cost/FTE for the department. Examine the relative benefits of an external review process versus other approaches to understanding stakeholder needs and issues of program quality. Consider possible curricular strategies (modular development) to improve the success of students in ENG 112. Pilot test plagiarism software, such as turnitin.com Overall Assessment of Department’s Progress and Goals: The English department’s involvement in the inaugural year of the department/program review process is laudable. In the well-attended review meeting, a variety of topics were discussed. In some instances, issues identified revealed a need for increased communication and understanding of departmental activities and college-level support structures. With the establishment and data-driven prioritization of activities, the English department will be in better position to support the needs of the college. Institutional or Resource Barriers to the Department’s Ability to Accomplish its Goals, if any: o Discussion during this department review identified a need to activate the waitlist feature in Colleague to provide information on the number of students who tried to register for the course and found it closed. o The English department asked about the possible availability of professional tutors for the Writing Center.